Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
In support of their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, the appellants failed to proffer evidence in admissible form sufficient "to eliminate any material issues of fact from the case" (Winegrad v. New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 N.Y.2d 851, 853; see also, Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320). The Supreme Court therefore properly denied the motion. In reaching this determination, we have not considered the appellants' arguments concerning causation, which were improperly raised for the first time in the reply papers submitted on the motion for summary judgment ( see, Pinkston v. Weiss, 238 A.D.2d 393; Lumbermens Mut. Cas. Co. v. Morse Shoe Co., 218 A.D.2d 624; Ritt v. Lenox Hill Hosp., 182 A.D.2d 560).
Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, O'Brien and Ritter, JJ., concur.